Only Bigots oppose the Mosque....right?

[BT]

A) it's not based on "my" definition

You posted it and you didn't attribute it to anyone else, as is usually the custom when posting someone elses words. 

And again the symbolic link between this mosque and these individual terrorists who answered Bin Ladens call is what again? Oh yeah the religion of Islam. and it's OK to be prejudiced against Muslims because pat Buchanan says so.

[sirs]

A) it's not based on "my" definition

You posted it and you didn't attribute it to anyone else, as is usually the custom when posting someone elses words.

The words were from dictionary.com.  Fatwa was introduced by you, and attibuted to Bin Ladin.  I merely helped connect your dots

  

[BT]

The words were from dictionary.com.  Fatwa was introduced by you, and attibuted to Bin Ladin.  I merely helped connect the dots

Yes but according to your posted definition, PBS erred in calling it a fatwa. So we are left with it being a declaration of war.

[sirs]

When did the Public Broadcasting System enter the debate?  Declaration of war??  oy

[BT]

They were the source for the posting of the declaration. I provided the link. Did you miss it?

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/terrorism/international/fatwa_1996.html

[sirs]

Apparently I wasn't paying attention to the link.  So, they got it wrong in reporting it, or Bin Ladin got it wrong for declaring it?

[BT]

So, they got it wrong in reporting it

They got it wrong calling it a fatwa.

[sirs]

Ahhhh, then your beef isn't with me, it's with PBS

[Kramer]

Ahhhh, then your beef isn't with me, it's with PBS

isn't PBS progressive i.e. liberal?

[sirs]

Overall, I do believe they lean left.  Trying to say that the left "got it wrong" again?   

[Henny]

You know Bt, if "Christian" Zealots, in the "name of God", firebombed an Islamic hospital, killing thousands of men, women, and children, I wouldn't support the idea of a Christian Church being built right across the street, if the people didn't want it.  Especially if the owner of the property demanded such a spot.  And especially if it were perfectly legal.  Me, A Christian, showing such blatant intolerance to my own religion??

Or could it be the location as being the issue.

I feel compelled to weigh in on the topic.

I am 100% against the Ground Zero Mosque.

Regardless of the intentions - even if it is not meant to be a hostile or provocative statement - it is nothing short of rubbing salt in the wound. Moreover, it's plain STUPID. It's begging for trouble - anger, vandalism - you name it. And the builders MUST know that.

However, I take it one step further - I go with what I've read by the Center for Inquiry on this topic - to deny Muslims the right to build a mosque wherever they like IS very un-American. Simple solution - do not allow ANY house of worship for ANY faith to build in the district. No mosques... but no churches, synagogues or temples either. Problem solved.

[sirs]

I agree with Miss Henny 99%, especially on the reasons why its such poor judgement in the location, if it is indeed supposed to be a structure to facilitate Islamic sensitivity & tolerance.  The choice of location, will indeed bring about the polar opposite effect

But legally, and more important, constitutionally, this Imam has an absolute right to build it on any private property, he wants to.  Should he though??  If he wants to tell America to go pound sand, absolutely.  You think that's what he wants? 

[sirs]

Regardless of the intentions - even if it is not meant to be a hostile or provocative statement - it is nothing short of rubbing salt in the wound.

[BT]

I feel compelled to weigh in on the topic.

I am 100% against the Ground Zero Mosque.

Regardless of the intentions - even if it is not meant to be a hostile or provocative statement - it is nothing short of rubbing salt in the wound. Moreover, it's plain STUPID. It's begging for trouble - anger, vandalism - you name it. And the builders MUST know that.

However, I take it one step further - I go with what I've read by the Center for Inquiry on this topic - to deny Muslims the right to build a mosque wherever they like IS very un-American. Simple solution - do not allow ANY house of worship for ANY faith to build in the district. No mosques... but no churches, synagogues or temples either. Problem solved.

Surprising take on this, Henny. My argument for the Mosque is also two-fold. As you stated it is Un- American to deny Muslims the right to build their Mosque wherever they choose as long as it conforms to existing building codes. And secondly i don't buy "the salt in the wound" argument because that sanctifies the notion that all Muslims share Bin Laden and his band of Merry Men's guilt. And i just don't buy that.

As a side-note i do agree that to go ahead and build in the face of so much public pressure against it could be seen as stupid, but it certainly is a principled stand and sometimes courage is needed to go against the mob. And yeah i see the outcry against the building as no more than an ignorant mob foaming at the mouth but lacking the courage to just say Muslims should be relegated to second class citizenship because some of the members of their group acted in a despicable way. And the qualifier that these second class citizens can built anywhere else they want is just bullshit.

[sirs]

See Miss Henny, you're a bigot apparently.  Couldn't possibly be the location of this Mosque, or the epidemic outrage its bringing about from a vast majority of the country, when its supposedly to bring about an opposite state of mind.  No, deep down, you must be a bigot.

And it really requires this Imam to "dig in", take a "principled stand", and demand tolerance & sensitivity, dammit.